The Biggest Losers: The full cast list of the EFC drugs issue and who has lost the most (and least) throughout

It was only a matter of time but it is clear that the anger and name-calling that accompanies many parts of the Essendon drugs issue has made its way onto the Almanac pages.

Whilst I have played a (minor and occasional) part in expressing my opinions and disgust at various parts of the ongoing soap opera, it has been my Almanac colleague and much more experienced writer and commentator, Craig Little, who has started to get on the nerves of various Essendon supporters.

Craig doesn’t need me to speak or stand up for him. As he has mentioned, he has a thick skin, as you need to have in his profession, and has been called worse, however it is equally a shame but not a surprise that it has come to this.

In some ways, it is a credit to, and indication of, the growth and value of the Almanac as a place for serious and well-written sports debate and criticism that this should take place. However, whilst I don’t think the vast majority of readers and contributors want this site to be solely about match reports in which we all talk about what a lovely time we had sitting with friends in the outer while our side was beaten, I equally don’t want it to become Big Footy or the comments sections in the Hun.

With that in mind, it is worth turning to a look at who is winning and who is suffering out of this amazing process, since it began. As I have written before, I think the players were overlooked and treated shamefully in 2012 and 2013, and the frantic and self-absorbed legal battles based on debating issues of process and fine-print make that even more clear to me now. However, over this journey, it is worth noting that there are many other losers, both formally and figuratively, for example, lost incomes or jobs, and more generally and esoterically, things like trust, faith and reputation.

In no particular order then, the casualty list so far – who has lost what, and who has come out barely scarred:

Ian Robson – remember Ian? He did the honourable and commercially and corporately correct thing as Essendon CEO in mid-2013 by tendering his resignation (immediately when this broke and a number of times again before accepted) as he stated that as the CEO, he should have known what was occurring in his football club, regardless of its legality. An experienced and highly valued administrator, he is now out of the AFL system and at the Melbourne Victory.

Steven Dank – whilst he has yet to face any financial penalties, (although that’s still a strong possibility under ASADA rules), it is safe to say that he has incurred large legal costs, as well as effectively being made completely unemployable in his chosen profession, with a shattered reputation.

Dean Robinson –the first fall-guy and a seemingly forgotten person in all this, he was suspended by Essendon, unlike many others involved, then terminated and he too cannot expect to ever again earn an income from the industry he relied on to work. He is currently engaged in a legal battle with an angry and non-conciliatory ex-employer, whilst engaging very expensive legal counsel.

Danny Corcoran – fined, suspended, and now gone from Essendon, you’d be hesitant to employ him in a senior capacity at your club now.

Mark Thompson – a significant fine, (which may not yet be paid) balanced by what we assume is a pay increase for added responsibilities in 2014, but his cherished and well-earned reputation as an honoured and respected Premiership captain and coach has been undoubtedly tarnished, and someone who left coaching due to workload issues has been thrust back into it again.

David Evans – his health severely affected by this in early to mid-2013, he is now gone from a position he seemed to enjoy holding, with long friendships broken and a lifelong relationship with Essendon tarnished, probably beyond repair.

Paul Little – well known in the business community as hard-nosed and successful before this, he is now known through football circles as the same. Little is wealthy enough to not notice any financial cost in this matter, and probably isn’t particularly fussed about his overall reputation. Anyone who dealt with him in corporate life wouldn’t be surprised at all by his approach, passion, dogged determination to win or willingness to go legal, however I’d argue he has lost some of the business credibility and status he worked hard for and also support for his club amongst fellow clubs and presidents, as well as made an enemy of the League.

Essendon as an organisation – the club has vacillated in making senior internal appointments (CEO, HR), with various important roles being delayed, further adding to the perception of whether governance is really seen as important at the EFC. The financial cost to the club through legal costs alone will be substantial, of that there is no doubt, and you’d argue that the club’s ability to be sure they are attracting the highest quality employees, draft picks or traded players will be impacted in some way. Equally, the amount of money the EFC has to invest in their core business, winning football matches, is adversely affected by unplanned money being spent elsewhere. Membership levels are still high it must be pointed out, but sponsors and members must be watching the legal battles with some concern.

Bruce Reid – A Life Member of the AFL and a well-respected figure through his club, a life’s work is being impacted by questions of why he was marginalised during this issue by Dank etc, and more importantly, who supported his exclusion. Especially if they were those he counted as friends. He rightly fought to ensure his reputation wasn’t hit by the AFL, and whilst mud will not likely stick to him, you cannot but feel he is a loser in this as are the next group.

The 34 Players – without going over old ground, or replaying articles I have written, the players who have been issued show-cause notices continue to live under a major professional and health-related cloud. The fact that they still do not know what was injected into them is the main matter here, as is any threat to their ability to earn a living doing what they love to do, and no amount of solution through the courts will rectify that. As admirable as the on-field performances of those still at the EFC continue to be (and interesting that in 2013 and 2014, they play best when away from Melbourne and with their backs against the wall), they have been the innocent parties and losers in all this. As to whether this flows onto other clubs who have traded for players who may now have these notices, or may in the future, is still to be seen, but their trust in the organisation that asks so much of them must be dampened. This must impact their ability to focus, as well as have continued faith in their club. Regardless of potential suspensions or long term health issues, they have lost the most through this. Whilst they had a responsibility to know what was happening with their bodies, they were at best lied to and at worst, treated like guinea pigs and fools.

Supporters/Members – this falls into two categories, both of whom have lost something. There are those who just love footy and their club, but who have had their faith in both bruised by all this, will lose if they again miss out on seeing their players compete in the finals as they did last year, are being asked to part with more of their hard-earned to support costly legal matters, and have to explain to everyone they meet what their position is on the matter when their red and black status is revealed. The other losers are those who vehemently deny this took ever place and see a conspiracy in every action. They have lost as they are being driven by their club to a corner from which anger and vitriol is the only way out. Whilst I admire their passion for their side, they have also been let down in being forced to be aggressive and take such sides.

Journalism –with some notable exceptions the two main newspapers and the associated role those print journalists have in other forms of media, have been lined up as proxy PR firms for either side of this debate. As such, many journalists are compromised, having had information leaked to them by different parties, and it is difficult to know who to believe any more.

The AFLPA – few losses so far, except for I believe they were slow to protect the players. Their fight now seems to be with ASADA and to a lesser extent the AFL. Legal costs will also be high, but the AFLPA’s big moment may be still to come; if any players are suspended and/or found guilty, the AFLPA’s fight will then be with Essendon, which could be interesting to watch.

The AFL – whilst it is difficult to look at cause and effect, and the state of the game on-field is a contributing factor, crowds and interest in the AFL as a sport seems down, and the scandal could not have helped. Their image has taken a hit, both their clear willingness to do deals to manufacture an outcome and also their lack of diplomacy from their ex CEO when it has come to muzzling various Essendon voices. They have assumed their size and importance would influence ASADA and that the timing of any investigation would suit their own calendar, particularly in 2013, where they came up with a solution in advance of any ASADA action to suit the finals, making some people believe the matter was closed. Satisfying sponsors, presenting always as lily-white and touting yourself around as a dominant brand are all difficult whilst this issue remains.

ASADA – for a body charged with keeping our many sports clean, they have been exposed as being under-staffed and disorganised. Be that the truth or not, it is clear that the average football supporter has lost faith with them. Whilst their credibility has been recovered in parts by their new CEO, and they do work at their own pace (witness Olympic gold medals being taken away by WADA many years after being awarded), they have definitely lost out in all of this.

Which brings us to the central figure in all of this, by design and by occasional admission: James Hird – What has he lost?

Formally: Whilst Hird stated at that fateful presser at AFL House early last year that he took full responsibility, his summary looks like this: (1) a suspension, during which he admittedly doesn’t get to do what he loves, which is to coach, but he is still paid his full (large) salary, in advance, and is (2) studying a top notch overseas management course with what we assume must be some form of financial support from his employer; (3) a contract extension, and (4) he has a guaranteed job and salary to return to, and at worst, (5) a significant pay-out in the vicinity of $2M should that not occur. He will (potentially) lose financially through major legal costs, but as with Paul Little (whilst not nearly in the same wealth league) these fees are unlikely to leave the financial burden they would on, say, a Dean Robinson.

Informally: If you were to state to someone when Hird retired, or took the EFC role, that his legacy could one day have an asterisk next to it that it does with Carey or Ablett Senior on character grounds, you’d be laughed at. However, that is where Hird now stands. Even if he was to have come clean and been honest at the very outset, his well-earned reputation as one of the finest players of his club’s history and a true champion of our game would still have suffered. Now though, that people have seen his staggering arrogance and a blinkered drive to win at all costs, on the field, in the medical room and in the courts, his halo is definitely rusted beyond repair.

Having said that, compared to: the impact on the jobs and careers of Robson, Dank, Robinson and Corcoran; weighed up against the state of his beloved club, its members and supporters, and; opposed to the lot of players that placed their trust in him and now find themselves under such media, legal and professional scrutiny, he has suffered way less.

The ultimate paradox is that in the end, Hird could lose the least out of everyone.

Any winners? Few I can think of. Baker and McKenzie as Age investigative journos are two, as is Richard Ings who keeps reminding us he once ran ASADA. Regardless of the outcome eventually being that the drugs used were either banned or not, the damage is done, and every party will walk away in some way dirty and affected.

A cynic would say that the only ones who will win will be the lawyers and the QCs. Luckily, there’s no cynic in sight here.

Related

Comments

Very reasoned, Sean.
And at the risk of turning the comments section of your article into Big Footy…….:
Could I also mention the big coterie groups, such as
The Essendonians?
I was recently talking to a senior member of the Easendonians who told me that they, and other powerful coteries at Bomberland, have made their feelings known to the club – ‘loud and clear’ – that Hird is not to be welcomed back

The Biggest Losers? Easy – naivety, innocence – the sense that Australia and Australian football was separate and different to the ruthless cut and thrust “winner takes all” of modern commercial sport.
The rest is a sideshow. Essendon is just the high water mark of what we are becoming. AFL is a commodity, and we are just all grasping consumers of the infotainment, gambling, glamour and products it sells.

We’ll done , Sean a excellent we’ll thought out article , the biggest loser is the GAME in cricket now when ever there is a unusual occurrence the thought of match fixing occurs it has damaged the sport for ever . With this saga all the publicity has damaged the game untold and that is the main point which unfortunately in my opinion , Essendon or as the kids call them the druggies just don’t get . In relation to Hird a magnificent player but his legacy to the game he has left is a selfish arrogant fool .Great stuff , Sean

Hird is undoubtedly the biggest loser of all when you look at the before and after pictures. His fall is long and just as self-inflicted.

Any Church preacher looking for a contemporary illustration of that statement of Jesus, ‘He who tries to save his life will only lose it faster’, need look no further than James Hird. And to follow up a glib Bible reference with an even lamer and less original piece of Shakespeare mangling, IMO Hird is still Hamlet. Not Iago, or the pompous git in Twelfth Night,

Another anti Essendon anti Hird article or
Opinion piece cheered on by the boys club at the footy almanac. What a joke of a group this really is. IMO a group that blows wind up each other as they are like minded and biased. Very few balanced I biased journos in this saga Chip le Grande, Mick Ellis Martin Blake to name a few if you care to take your blinkers off and read. Cheers

Al nobody’s forcing you to hang around as far as I can tell, and how we’re meant to give a rat’s tossbag that you think we’re a joke when 3 days ago you most likely hadn’t heard of us, beats the crap outta me…

Yes, Alan. Although there is no ‘we’ as such at the Almanac, this community (however imagined) has some cultural traits. I reckon we’re ecumenical in our tastes, so we’re reading the key fact-finders and opinion-leaders. Happy to take further advice.

We’re a writing site. With a leg-spinner’s sensibility. We land one every now and then.

Very happy to publish your words if you ever choose to call for the Kookaburra in essay form, and even your comments add to the Almanac’s canon (or should that be cannon?).

Not fair to beat up on Alan, you guys. Check out his self-penned song about the Bombers on YouTube if you want to see the Springsteen of the Hird choir. You full-on rock, Al.
PS, Not meaning to be rude, but is that a cell you’re in? No biggie if so. Many a good tune penned in supermax.

We have guests, they should be welcomed. If we only let in or encourage those that agree with us, we risk becoming a cult.

Whilst some of the Essendon articles in recent days have uncovered new contributors, I don’t want this to be a little club of like-minded folk.

If we value this site as a refuge from rubbish media pieces and a place where debate and opinion can flourish, then we’ll attract lots of people, who may not and shoudl not be in total agreement the whole time.

Now, I do agree that in recent days, some of the commentary has got a bit fruity and that’s a shame, but it’s been on all sides.

What I wrote (and what many others have in their articles) have been opinions, as often as possible backed with facts but opinions none the less. The difference between what is fact and what is opinion I will admit has been one reason the entire Esssendon debate has been so difficult, in mainstream media and here alike.

Alan, welcome, to you, Luke and others and I hope you stick around. My piece wasn’t necessarily anti Hird, but yes, I feel strongly about the role he has played and how he has fared compared to some, expecially those forgotten like Evans and Robson. How his reputation stays untouched by all this is beyond me. However, I am not anti Essendon per se, having written two pieces in the last twelve months that very much side with the players.

Is it the club, the players, the company, what? Can you dislike Paul Little and James Hird, but support the players? Or, can I believe the 34 are at fault but excuse Goddard, and Chapman (and David Z who hates needles!)

Personally, I like debate, welcome soemone taking the time to read and reply in any form to what I bang out, and would hate to be in the middle of a collective love in. Disagree, agree, all’s fine. Write your own pieces, as there’s been precious little pro Essendon pieces and statements about the club defending it on the Almanac, outside of the comments to Litza’s piece in the last few days.

As John said, climb on board, we aren’t all bad, and if you think we do blow smoke up each other, better the reason to come inside the tent and break that up

I apologize to Alan and anybody else concerned by my reaction to some recent posts that seemed to favor the Essendon side of the drugs controversy. When I can get onto YouTube I’ll certainly check out that claim about Alan and Bruce Springsteen.

I have no problem at all with anybody expressing an opinion I disagree with. On this particular subject I actually don’t have much of an opinion left anyway, being as I said on Sunday a tad jacked off with the AFL for a variety of reasons. What I reacted to was not the opinions of Alan and Muncha (or Luke or Life Ban) but the tone in which they were expressed in a couple of cases. Many of Litza’s pieces on Carlton have irritated me over the years but because he’s been on the scene since about forever and me off and on for about 20 mins, I’d no more whinge about it than go to Tamworth and try to ban country music. Or go onto Bigfooty and whine about the language. The same post from the same JCL, only anti-Essendon, would have copped exactly the same response.

Luke here. Don’t worry, I’m not here to swear at anyone this time round. I came to this site some time back with an article on life inside the Essendon Laager. I had hoped to generate discussion on perspectives and point of view but hadn’t counted on the depth of anti-Essendon sentiment here and the thing degenerated into a slanging match.

I came back this week to look for a review of the Port match but found an article by the People’s Elbow which basically said that EFC could just STFU. It repeated the tag line eight times throughout the short piece. I took offence, gave the writer a piece of my mind, posted some pro-EFC stuff and the slanging match resumed. Which is fine. But when one of the contributors suggested that the saga was the most serious episode in Australian sport, and stuck by his opinion even when I pointed out that sports people here have actually died during events, I realised it was time to agree to disagree and move on.

So I popped back in today to look again for the Port match review and found that although the article was about the Port fans and the game itself, the first respondent decided to post a bunch of the usual ASADA-related offal. Then I found this article and some of the responses to Alan’s response and thought maybe this forum isn’t for me. You’re welcome to your group thinking – I like a bit of the old communal self-affirmation sometimes myself and often go to Essendon web forums for my fix – but the Memphis Evangelical Baptist Church probably isn’t the place to go debating your ideas on evolution and Footy Almanac probably isn’t the place to go debating the finer points of the ASADA/AFL/EFC saga.

I hope to return when this all settles down and maybe talk about footy with you people.

We should all remember – it is only a game.
Essendon are only a club – one of thousands.
Hird is only a floppy haired fella – with a Brownlow and a bad case of the golden boy guilts.
We will all move on…in about three years.

For mine, I’d encourage some pro EFC or at least EFC defending, to balance.

I truly hope that we discover that the players weren’t given anything illegal.

I do however think that many people, including many outside the EFC, like Andy D, have come out of this poorly. I don’t think there’ll be many winners and some of this will linger for years, sadly. I feel mostly for supporters like yourself, who I appreciate cannot have any conversation with anyone about your club or footy without being asked or expected to touch on this.

And in reality, this is a footy issue. Dank just happened to do this at EFC (not injecting drugs but running what I think we all agree was a shady program), but other clubs liked him and he could have easily implemented this program at other places, my club included. If he was smart enough to get around Bruce Reid, a guy I respect, then he could be smarter than the average bear.

I wish to explain my point re believing the , Ess saga is the most serious episode ever in aust sporting history to bring the call people have died playing sport is the most serious is not a realistic comparison of course people dying is more imp but how bout comparing it to , Shane Warne re the alleged tablet from his mum getting banned from the World Cup and a years suspension ( I think he got off lightly as do a number of the aust players ) or the aust Olympic fencer when caught claimed it was from drinking coffee . We aust are fantastic at blaming others , Chinese swimmers ,
German runners but will never admit our mistakes and take the punishment which
Essendon are totally guilty of

Blinkers off for goodness sake Mick W for the most negligent , unprofessional stuff up ever . Penalized already ? That is 1 thing Caro is spot on about ! How Adelaide were penalized re the Tippett affair as severely basically is ludicrous . The damage Essendon have done to the game is impossible to fathom , wonder how many people have left afl footy already and with no end in site and what ever any 1 thinks it is caused by Essendon re what ever it takes !

Sean, not a bad write up, but two serious flaw. You, like so many others have assumed Hird is guilty, and hence written from that perspective.

“However, that is where Hird now stands. Even if he was to have come clean and been honest at the very outset, his well-earned reputation as one of the finest players of his club’s history and a true champion of our game would still have suffered. Now though, that people have seen his staggering arrogance and a blinkered drive to win at all costs, on the field, in the medical room and in the courts, his halo is definitely rusted beyond repair.”

Where I ask, is the proof that Hird did not come clean right from the start? Where is the proof, (a very important word proof), that Hird has lied? Is it in the writing of the unofficial mouthpiece of the AFL, The Age? All I have seen from that paper and especially it’s chief football writer, is a lot of vindictive, self serving, unaccountable diatribes, on how everything is about Hird. The only person who has made this about Hird, is Caroline Wilson. Hird has consistently stated that the program they instituted was legal, which was backed up by the email he sent to staff, and that when the truth comes out the club, (the club, not Hird) would be in a good place. Why is it arrogance to try to clear your name if you believe you have done no wrong? Should Hird go calmly to footballs version of the electric chair, just so a few football followers can say to themselves, “See, always knew he was too good to be true”? Doesn’t he have the right to defend his players, his club and himself? Isn’t that what our society’s law is based on, the presumption of innocence? Remember the last time the Australian press got it all wrong? A lady called Lindy Chamberlain had her life destroyed, because she got the same treatment, guilty in the court of public opinion. Shouldn’t we be waiting for the judges decision? As a passionate Essendon supporter, I have no issue with Hird taking a whack, IF he is proven to have done something wrong, but until there is PROOF, I will continue to grant him and the club the benefit of the doubt that they are entitled to. Just remember, a show cause notice is not a charge, even less so when it contains absolutely no information. That’s like me asking you to prove you didn’t do something illegal for you entire life, but not actually referencing what it is I think you may have done. Essentially, the SC’s were a fishing expedition by ASADA.

“Dean Robinson –the first fall-guy and a seemingly forgotten person in all this, he was suspended by Essendon, unlike many others involved, then terminated and he too cannot expect to ever again earn an income from the industry he relied on to work. He is currently engaged in a legal battle with an angry and non-conciliatory ex-employer, whilst engaging very expensive legal counsel.”

On this one unfortunately, you have really fallen into group think. Dean Robinson was suspended, but was on full pay. He WAS NOT terminated, he resigned to take up the six figure sum offered by a media network for an exclusive interview. If he had not resigned, it is quite possible that he may still be employed at Essendon, albiet in a slightly changed role. His current state of financial affairs is partially of his own doing.

Malcolm, Adelaide deliberately cheated the salary cap and were found guilty. Steven Trigg should have been kicked out of the game for longer.

Governance is being confused with doping. We were punished by the AFL for poor governance or in your words “negligent unprofessional stuff up ever” , without an opportunity to answer our charges. We accepted our punishment. Therefore I don’t understand what you mean by “admit our mistakes and take the punishment”. We’ve already admitted our mistakes and taken the punishment?

What is beyond doubt is that if any Essendon players are found guilty of doping, Hird, Thompson, the EFC board have no option but to leave the game forever and rightly so. As a member this is the least I would expect.

All the EFC are saying we didn’t take a banned drug. ASADA after 17 F!@#$%^ months have nothing. If they did, then there would be 34 players on the ROF, waiting on infraction notices from the AFL, and be out of the game for 2 years.

And with Hird. remember also, he was happy to have his charges heard by an independent panel, but was denied this by the commission. Hird has nothing to hide. Wonder who does?

I stand corrected on Robinson’s situation, thank you. I would however still regardless of that see him as someone who has lost out in this situation, even if (in part) by his own hand.

If, and I take your point, the truth is that there was nothing at all wrong with what was injected, then many people will have losts lots for naught, which will be even worse for many concernced. My various points (and I will happily admit there is a bias against Hird in my article) is that few will win from this. I would argue that again, regardless of the outcome, Hird will have suffered in some way, which as a total admirer of him as a player, will be sad, if there is nothing found to have occurred.

I think Dank is the core and key, and had he ran a tighter program, we may never have come to this. I accept that Hird should have the right to clear his name. But I have always felt sad for Robson (who I will declare I have a slight acquantance with) who left as he said he should have known what was going on, but Hird, equally who should have known, remained. But I take your point that he feels he has done nothing wrong.

The overall point of the piece is that whether this proves true or not, whether it has been a beat up or a major issue, whether ASADA are right or not, many reputations have been hit and hurt by this. Even if the media has played a major role as judge and executioner, or defender, you’d have to admit that Hird, even if thsi comes to naught, is one who will not be looked at the same way by many football people after this is over

COGNITIVE DISSONANCE is what maybe just maybe we All including me are suffering from at the moment. None of us still know the TRUTH as it was completely swept under the carpet by the AFL. If all thus had gone to court at that time we would all have got the TRUTH. There is only one man that knows what went into our boys and that is Danks.
At the time when the deal was done I said MONEY and CONVENIENCE prevailed over TRUTH and JUSTICE. I even said so when this all started that IF HIRD and co and the players deliberately and knowingly set out to CHEAT then I would
Not just walk away from Essendon but from Footy altogether a game I embraced when I migrated to this lovely country.
We had corporate governance issues which was exposed by our own report by Ziggy. We got hung on that report and fair enough too. We got punished as well for it and fair enough too but right now all we have is circumstantial evidence on ONE SUPPLEMENT when it started with a about 30 plus at the time the hysteria was reported.
Right now none of us know the FACTS so how about we wait till we get them before we hang dry and quarter anyone or any club? Or is that too much to ask? By the way I was invited to this site. Not invited but begged by one on here to come on here but now since I do not agree with his opinion I have suddenly become an idiot, stupid and illogical! Go figure!